Sustainable Land Management and Smallholder Farmers in Zimbabwe

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Study

In the sub-Saharan continent of Africa, agriculture is the backbone of the

economy. In Zimbabwe, land underpins the economic, social, and political lives of most

people (Hakeem, 2015; Moyo et al., 2019). According to researchers, land management

and agricultural strategies in Zimbabwe need to compete with environmental goals to

sustain better land, water, soil nutrients, and biodiversity (Kadzamira & Ajayi, 2019;

Nezomba, Mtambanengwe, Tittonell, & Mapfumo, 2017). The Fast Track Land Reform

Program (FTLRP) in Zimbabwe, instituted in 2005, provided land to the landless and

poor people who lived in the country’s rural areas (Moyo, Chambati, & Yeros, 2019).

These new smallholder farmers face sizable challenges, including climate change,

drought, unpredictable market, unskilled labor, crop and animal pests and diseases,

sickness and accidents, and changing agricultural policies and political influences (Dube,

Moyo, Ncube, & Nyathi, 2016).

Nevertheless, stakeholders have found it difficult to disseminate such knowledge

to those who could benefit from it. The lack of suitable mechanisms for disseminating the

available knowledge on sustainable land management through training to smallholder

farmers in Zimbabwe presents a barrier to innovation and sustainable adoption of viable

land management techniques (Bertin, Zacharie, Ann, Ebenezar, & Alain, 2014;

Chagumaira et al., 2016). Before such training can be offered to address the smallholder

farmer's needs, more research is needed. Specifically, qualitative researchers should

explore the specific knowledge among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe to tailor

sustainable land management training to their particular needs (Mapiye, 2016; Stoeffler,

Alwang, Mills, & Taruvinga, 2016).

Agriculture and food security are key factors in most sub-Saharan countries of

Africa. This study may provide knowledge and new options to support smallholder

farmers to achieve food security by better managing agricultural risks associated with

climate shocks (Masikati, Descheemaeker, & Crespo, 2019). Additionally, this study may

assist agricultural experts, policymakers, and other stakeholders concerned about food

security, poverty, livelihoods, and sustainability of agriculture production in Zimbabwe

in their efforts to adopt new approaches for future agricultural implementation.

This chapter provides insight into the potential impact and challenges of

smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe with sustainable land management. I will present

background information and state the problem, including a description of the gap in the

scholarly literature knowledge. Following is a presentation of the logical alignment

between the problem, purpose, and research question, and the study's conceptual

framework. After doing so, I define the key terms used throughout this study. Finally, I

discuss the assumptions, scope and delimitations, limitations, and significance of the

study.

Background of the Study

The FTLRP in Zimbabwe, instituted by legislation in 2005, provided land to the

landless and poor people who lived in rural areas (Moyo et al., 2019). Challenges faced

by the smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe who were granted over 80% of land through

land reform programs continue to this day, in a country where the majority of people

remain vulnerable to hunger and poverty (Scoones, 2015). Land underpins Zimbabwe's

economy, and agriculture is 70% of people who live in rural areas. Agriculture is the

mainstay of the rural economy, and agrarian livelihood was once viewed as the life of the

future. Nevertheless, Zimbabwe finds itself facing an agrarian crisis where 70% of people

living in rural areas fail to raise agricultural productivity (World Bank, 2017).

The world is grappling with how to provide food and nutrition to a projected

population of 9 billion by 2050 (World Bank, 2017). In Zimbabwe, the economy is in

deep trouble due to the transformations brought about by the FTLRP, which caused the

agricultural sector to collapse (Moyo et al., 2019). The most serious implication of the

land reform of 2000 is its connection to food security and people’s livelihoods.

Agriculture contributes significantly to the livelihoods of over 70% of the population in

Zimbabwe, most of whom rely on rain-fed agriculture, making them vulnerable to the

effects of climate change (Makate et al., 2017).

The contentious issue in Zimbabwe is the continuous decline of agricultural

production (Makate, 2017). Smallholder farmers have continually blamed the land

reform program of 2000 for triggering the disruptions to the commercial agricultural

sector and the entire economy. There has been a shift in the explanation about

agricultural performance decline in the semiarid country of Zimbabwe. Several scholars

have argued that farmers’ lack of training in economic mismanagement, governance

issues, and soil fertility management is a major constraint to the economy and crop

production (Brown et al., 2012). Droppelmann et al. (2017) indicated that sustainable

intensification of agriculture is required in Africa in order for the continent to meet the

demands for food and the protection of resources.

The lack of education and exposure to information on climate change creates a

wide gap and renders smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe ill-prepared to handle climate

change and variability. Gukurume (2013) noted that climate change has severely affected

the majority of rural communities in Zimbabwe. Gukurume wrote that rural communities

have noted: “unpredictable rains, high temperature (heatwave), successive drought,

shortening rainfall seasons and seasonal changes in the timing of rainfall” (p. 89).

Climate change has compounded the vulnerability of most smallholder farmers and rural

communities in the country as they face food insecurity and abject poverty (Gukurume,

2013). Commenting on the economic implications of Zimbabweans’ dependence on

agriculture, Matondi (2012) and Gukurume (2013) wrote, “vulnerability thus manifests

itself in poorer countries and communities due to a lack of resources or entitlements and

lack of capability to respond or adapt to climate variability” (p. 91).

Slater et al. (2007) argued that the ability of any country to adapt and cope with

the hazards of climate change “depends on economic resources, infrastructure,

technology, and social safety net” (p. 91). There is a void between the increased

frequency of extreme weather conditions in Zimbabwe and the 80% of poor smallholder

farmers who have no adaptive capacity to successfully invest in agricultural activities

successfully. Mandoti (2012) has monitored Zimbabwe’s agricultural problems for over

16 years. After the land reform of 2000, the author noted that the agricultural sector never

recovered. Before FTLRP, there were better and well-organized and -managed

agricultural activities in the agriculture sector, and there was a strong lobby for

commercial firms, which resulted in strong supporting systems such as access to credit,

financing, better farming infrastructure, and sophisticated irrigation systems. Zamchiya

(2014) and Richardson (2015) argued that many smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe lack

the necessary information on climate change and the capital to buy farming equipment

and inputs such as seeds, fertilizer fuel. The absence of knowledge, skills, training, and

farming experience has led to the plunging of agricultural productivity in Zimbabwe,

which has led to increased poverty and other livelihood shocks in the country (Bjornlund

et al., 2019).

Problem Statement

Poor land management practices negatively affect smallholder farmers'

socioeconomic welfare in Zimbabwe, resulting in 70% of the national population living

in food-insecure households and below the poverty level (Bjornlund et al., 2019).

Agriculture and the smallholder farming sector dominate Zimbabwe’s economy,

contributing 15–20% of gross domestic product and providing employment and direct

livelihoods for about 70% of the population, including 30% of formal employment

(World Bank, 2017). Documented barriers to deliver and adopt sustainable land

management practices by smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe include economic capacity,

weak information technology development, lack of knowledge dissemination, inadequate

irrigation systems, and water delivery, degraded soils, conflicts among different interest

groups, and inadequate government policies (Johnson, Kovarik, Meinzen-Dick, Njuki, &

Quisumbing, 2016; Kellner, von Maltitz, Seely, Atlhopheng, & Lindeque, 2018). The

general problem is the lack of training on sustainable land management practices among

smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe (Chagumaira, Ririnda, Nezomba, Mtambanengwe, &

Mapfumo, 2016; Mapiye, 2016).

Despite field-based evidence that modern technologies can increase and sustain

agricultural yields, adoption levels of such technologies by smallholder farmers in

Zimbabwe have remained low (Kadzamira & Ajayi, 2019). The sustainability of

smallholder farms in Zimbabwe is largely dependent on farmers’ decision-making

abilities regarding land management practices, given the level of knowledge and

information available to them (Jiri, Mafongoya, & Chivenge, 2015; Mutsvangwa-Sammie

et al., 2016). Scholars indicate that the dissemination of innovative agricultural training

has been integral in solving many land management problems (Tatsvarei, Mushunje,

Matsvai, & Ngarava, 2018). Delivery of sustainable land management practices can be

accomplished if farmers accept trainers in their existing social networks (Dicecca,

Pascucci, & Contò, 2016). Should smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe not receive training

in sustainable land management techniques, the persistence of poverty and deteriorating

living conditions will continue to challenge smallholder farmers’ fragile livelihoods

(Helliker, Chiweshe, & Bhatarasa, 2018; Scoones, Mavedzenge, Murimbarimba, &

Sukume, 2018). The specific problem is that smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe have

knowledge gaps on sustainable land management practices, presenting a barrier to

training these farmers on innovative agricultural practices tailored to their needs (Makate,

Makate, Mango, & Siziba, 2019; Moyo et al., 2019; Scoones, Mavedzenge, &

Murimbarimba, 2018).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this qualitative multiple case study was to gain a deeper

understanding of specific knowledge gaps among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe to

tailor sustainable land management training to their needs. I used the qualitative

paradigm and a multiple case study methodology to address the research problem.

Semistructured interviews, archival data, and reflective field notes were used to explore

the specific knowledge gaps among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe on sustainable

land management practices. I triangulated the data sources to establish the credibility of

the study’s findings.

Research Question

The central research question was, What are the specific knowledge gaps among

smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe on sustainable land management practices?

Conceptual Framework

This study was framed first, by the sustainable livelihoods framework (Ashley &

Carney, 1999), which “provides an understanding of the livelihoods of local communities

being studied, what assets they have, and what they do/can do with these assets” (Yaro,

2004, p. 9), and, second, by the environmental entitlements framework, which focuses on

the wider influence and importance of diverse institutions operating at multiple-scale

levels from micro to macro (Leach, Mearns, & Scoones, 1999). These institutions

influence who has access to and control over what resources within a specific

environment and arbitrate contested resource claims (Leach et al., 1999). In Zimbabwe,

upon gaining independence in 1980, lawmakers realized that land reform represented a

powerful means for righting the country’s natives' wrongs in both social and economic

spheres. Land reform policies were deemed instrumental in tackling poverty for

disadvantaged populations, a case in point being rural dwellers, for whom subsistence

farming was critical to their livelihoods (Helliker et al., 2018; Scoones et al., 2018).

In previous studies, researchers have promoted the sustainable livelihoods

framework as a valuable tool for analyzing how farmers could acquire and maintain

resources for their work (Nikolakis & Grafton, 2015). Researchers using the sustainable

livelihoods framework as a theoretical lens have gathered farmers’ information, such as

who gained what, what assets the farmers accumulated, gender and distribution of assets,

and how assets have improved their livelihoods. Studies have shown that the FTLRP in

Zimbabwe has had mixed results on farmers’ livelihoods and enhanced the potential for

future agricultural production for smallholder farmers (Kellner et al., 2018; Murisa,

2011). In Zimbabwe’s case, while upholding land as an asset may have improved the

livelihoods of farmers, it has also likely endangered them (Mapiye, 2016). In this study,

the sustainable livelihoods framework was used as a theoretical lens to gain a deeper

understanding of the specific knowledge gaps among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe

(Dube, Homann-Kee Tui, Rooyen, & Rodriguez, 2014).

In a revised approach to the environmental realm set out by Sen (1981), Leach et

al. (1999) shifted emphasis to institutional aspects (from micro to macro scales)

impacting the ability of individuals to use, access, and manage environmental goods and

services, along with the implications of such a situation for various social actors. The

environmental entitlements framework can more practically be utilized as an analytical

toolbox offering insights into actors’ endowments, entitlements, capabilities, and

transformation of environmental goods and services (Leach et al., 1999). By

understanding the “institutional matrix” (Scoones, 1998, p. 12) influencing the

livelihoods of smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe, researchers can learn about sustainable

land management practices that may reverse rural farmers’ fragile livelihood systems in

Zimbabwe (Chagumaira et al., 2016; Mapiye, 2016). Coupled with poor land

management practices and rainfall variability, the dominant source of livelihood and

production risk in drier environments has also negatively affected the sustainability of

rain-fed smallholder agriculture in Zimbabwe (Makate et al., 2019; Scoones,

Mavedzenge, & Murimbarimba, 2018). Chapter 2 further elaborate on the logical

connections among key elements of the conceptual framework to the study’s purpose and

explain how the framework relates to the study approach, research question, and research

method.

Nature of the Study

The study's nature was qualitative to logically align with the purpose of the study

and provide data for the research questions. A descriptive multiple case study was used as

the research design for the study, given that the study’s purpose called for a deeper

understanding of the complex social phenomena of land management practices and

livelihood strategies among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe (Yin, 2017). Before the

needs of the smallholder farmer can be adequately addressed, scholars recommended that

qualitative studies should explore the specific knowledge gaps among smallholder

farmers in Zimbabwe on sustainable land management practices to tailor sustainability

training to their needs (Dube et al., 2014; Mapiye, 2016; Stoeffler et al., 2016).

Qualitative research explores the world of a given context from the viewpoint of the

people living in it and is associated with the interpretivist paradigm (Cooper & White,

2012). The dialogue developed between researcher and participants with the in-depth

interview method of qualitative research approaches can bring forth new meanings from

within a given social context. From a historical perspective, qualitative research

methodologies for the interpretivist paradigm were developed to give a voice to a

society’s victims of oppression and their struggles with dominant institutions,

organizations, and social groups for social change (Cooper & White, 2012).

A multiple case study investigating a social phenomenon can involve individuals

living within that social context as a separate unit of study (Yin, 2017). When the data

focus is only on individuals in a multiple-case study design, the study’s central

phenomenon, in this case, smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe, is the context and not the

target of the study (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007; Yin, 2017). The unit of analysis will be

the smallholder farmer in Zimbabwe. This design allows for investigating differences

within and between cases (Yin, 2017). Participants for this case study were recruited

using purposeful criterion and snowball sampling strategies and screened with the

following inclusion criteria: adults over the age of 18; smallholder farmer in Zimbabwe;

acquired their farming from the FTLRP in Zimbabwe instituted in 2005; and possess

knowledge regarding the experiences with the topic of the study (Patton, 2014). Snowball

sampling is the most common form of purposeful sampling and works by asking a few

key participants who already meet the study's criteria to refer others who may also meet

the criteria (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). I conducted seven in-depth face-to-face individual

interviews with smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe. Schram (2006) recommended a range

of five to 10 participants for a qualitative study, stating that a larger sample size may

thwart a deeper investigation of the phenomena under study.

Definitions

Agricultural innovation systems (AIS): A strategy to enhance technologies for

“agricultural research and development conducted through various training and

innovation platform establishment” (Triomphe et al., 2014, p. 89). The primary purpose

of AIS is to mitigate hunger and poverty by enhancing economic development in sub-

Saharan Africa (Triophe et al., 2014).

Biodiversity: Environmentally friendly land use that helps to conserve all three

elements of agricultural biodiversity, namely genetic diversity of domesticated crops,

animals, fish, and trees; diversity of wild species on which agricultural production

depends (such as wild pollinators, soil micro-organisms, and predators of agricultural

pests); and diversity of wild species and ecological communities that use agricultural

landscapes and their habitat (Scoones, 2015, p. 23).

Communal Areas Management Program for Indigenous Resource Use

(CAMPFIRE): The Zimbabwe government created the program in 2005 to replace the

socially-just Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) and to resolve

the conflict that had broken out between the Zimbabwe rural populations and wildlife

megafauna. CAMPFIRE’s main objectives were the “enhancement and the conservation

of biodiversity and the rich natural heritage of Zimbabwe through effective participation

of communities and the generation of income for them” (Harison, 2015, p. 2).

The Zimbabwe government created Community-Based Natural Resource

Management (CBNRM): The natural resources management program in 1989 with the

primary purpose of conserving valued wildlife megafauna such as lions, buffalo, and

elephants as a way to promote rural livelihoods and development (Harison, 2015).

Decision-making: The degree to which a set of criteria--economic, environmental,

and social--are used to select the best/most sustainable system from a host of other

farming systems (Mutsvangwa-Sammie et al., 2015).

Drought-mitigating measures: The degree to which a large number of actions are

taken to minimize the impact of drought on the environment, economic, and social

systems (Nhundu et al., 2015).

Environmental entitlement framework (EEF): A conceptual framework that

highlights institutions' role in mediating the relationship between environment and

society. This view rests on the assumption that frameworks are grounded in entitlements

where social actors are positioned to command environmental goods and services

beneficial to their well-being (Chagumaira et al., 2016).

Fast Track Land Reform Program (FTLRP): The exercise where land was

confiscated by force by the Zimbabwe government from White farmers and was divided

into A1 model small-scale farms allocated to the poor and A2 model farms allocated to

resource-rich commercial farmers (Matondi, 2012).

Food security: Secure access by households and individuals to nutritionally

adequate food at all times and procured in conformity with human aspirations and dignity

(Yaro, 2004). According to Yaro (2004, p. 1), food security is an important component of

human welfare and development that must be safeguarded and sustained by the world,

national districts, villages, households, and individuals.

Indigenous knowledge: This term refers to indigenous knowledge due to its

connection to agricultural development and environmental conservation (Matondi, 2012).

Information technologies development: The degree to which the agricultural

sector uses national information infrastructures to support its agricultural development

activities (Johnson et al., 2016).

Innovation agricultural practice: The willingness to form an entirely new method

that transcends the current existing level of smallholder farming structure (Chagumaira et

al., 2016; Tatsvarei et al., 2018).

Knowledge dissemination: The degree to which new agricultural information and

technologies are shared in developing countries. The assumption of farmers to adapt or

innovate, make better decisions, and adopt a successful farming technology, the

information needed to be shared with other farmers (Johnson, 2016).

Land management: The complexity of both natural and managed ecosystems and

functions, including primary and secondary production, soil conservation, recycling of

soil nutrient and water resources (Mutsvangwa-Sammie et al., 2016).

Land management practices: The degree to which smallholder farmers use

manure, fertilizer, composts, and fallow to enhance soil fertility and land conservation

investments and guarantee long-term productivity (Scoones, 2015).

Rangeland management: An ecosystem complex consisting of native, natural

grasslands pastures that can include naturally or artificially revegetated lands to provide

plant cover. Rangeland management is an active approach by livestock farmers in the

semiarid savanna communal of Zimbabwe to employ restoration techniques to their farms

to improve crops and animal husbandry (Marques et al., 2016; Moyo et al., 2013).

Smallholder farmer: A concept that primarily refers to communal and small-scale

farmers but now includes resettled farmers who operate primarily for subsistence living

with very few farmers growing crops such as cotton and paprika for commercial

purposes. Smallholder farmers benefited from high-skilled commercial farmers for agro-

inputs and as a part of the public extension system. The land reform exercise of 2000 has

shifted the focus for agro-processing industries from large scale commercial farmers to

smallholder farmers (Zamchiya, 2013).

Socioeconomic: A measure that combines the social and economic status of an

individual, community, or nation; socioeconomic status is positively influenced by better

health (Moyo et al., 2016).

Sustainability: A term that describes farming systems' ability to continue fulfilling

their purpose in the future. The farming systems must be resourceful and socially,

commercially, and environmentally supportive.

Sustainable land management: Global efforts to restore degraded land and

preserve soil and land to “ensure the long-term continuation of ecosystem services”

(Margues et al., 2016, p. 2). Key principles to mitigate land degradation are “maintaining

and enhancing soil cover, reducing topsoil disturbances and compaction, rotating and

interplanting crop/plants, integrating crop and livestock systems, enhancing plant and

animal species diversity, and balancing nutrient withdrawal and replenishment” (Margues

et al., 2016, p. 2). Basic pillars of sustainable land management include enhancing

productivity, security, protection, viability, and social acceptance (Marques et al., 2016).

Sustainable livelihoods: A set of issues that comprise people’s capabilities, their

assets, and activities that are required as a means of living (Chagumaira et al., 2016).

Livelihood is considered sustainable “when it can cope with and recover from stress and

shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets while not undermining the natural

resource base” (Scoones, 1998, p. 5). Scoones give the generic definition (1998) refers to

sustainable livelihoods as people's capability to have access to livelihood resources that

comprise natural resources, economic resources, human resources, and social capitals.

Sustainable natural resource management (SNRM): A shift of focus in managing

public lands and resources where more attention is placed on sustaining ecosystems. The

process requires knowledge about the ecosystems, an understanding of the ecosystems'

relationships, and knowledge about the human values, activities, and resources to use

(Masikati et al., 2019).

Assumptions

Four assumptions influenced data collection and analysis strategies for the study.

The first assumption was that smallholder farmers would be willing to volunteer as

participants in this research study. The data collected from in-depth interviews would

provide honest, reliable, accurate, and well-articulated information on specific knowledge

gaps among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe on sustainable land management practice.

Exploration and description of smallholder farmers’ perspectives regarding specific

knowledge gaps rely on the presumption that the recruited participants’ real-life

experiences support in-depth knowledge on the study’s central topic. The successful

completion of similar studies (Jiri, Mofongo, & Chivenge, 2015; Mapiye, 2016)

suggested that the study’s research purpose was achieved by applying this method. The

study design included subject matter reviews to triangulate findings and address this

critical assumption.

A second study assumption of this study pertained to the integrity of the data

collection, processing, and analysis process. It was assumed that in-depth knowledge

about the study's purpose during the recording, coding, and analysis of the study data

would be accurately collected and reported.

The third assumption driving this study was that the multiple case study design

assumed that insights and perspectives recorded in the in-depth interviews would provide

the information needed to triangulate information from multiple sources’ findings

(Guion, Diehl, & McDonald, 2011; Patton, 2014). Being that the interviewer in this study

was also a native Zimbabwean, this shared cultural background helped establish rapport

and trust during the interview process so participants could feel comfortable sharing their

knowledge gaps in sustainable land management. It was assumed transcription of the

interview data would be accurate, and the study design included member checking to

address this assumption.

The fourth assumption of this study was that utilizing a multiple case study design

would contribute new knowledge to the study's conceptual framework and its underlying

theories. Yin (2017) indicated that the multiple case study design in qualitative research

and cross-case synthesis as a technique for analyzing qualitative data are preferred

methods for strengthening the validity and robustness of qualitative research.

Additionally, data analysis results using the multiple case study design are commonly

used to build or extend theory (Eisenhardt & Graebner, 2007).

Scope and Delimitations

This multiple case study was limited to seven smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe

with the following boundaries set on their participant characteristics: adults over the age

of 18; smallholder farmer in Zimbabwe; acquired their farming from the FTLRP in

Zimbabwe instituted in 2005; and possess knowledge regarding their experiences with

the topic of the study (Patton, 2014). The population's specific boundary was chosen due

to the need to fill knowledge gaps on sustainable land management practices of

smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe that cannot be explored by using other methodologies,

including assessments and surveys. This study excludes those smallholder farmers in

Zimbabwe who have previous successful experience with sustainable land management

practices. This study also excludes those smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe who received

training from nongovernment organizations, such as the United Nations Development

Programme (UNDP) on sustainable land management practices. Excluded from this study

are similar, yet different, conceptual frameworks, most notably the sustainable rural

livelihood framework by Scoones (2015), which excludes smallholder farmers'

indigenous knowledge and knowledge gaps on sustainable land management practices.

This research is transferable to smallholder farmers and their communities in

other sub-Saharan Africa regions because participants face similar economic, livelihood,

agricultural, and food security challenges as do many other smallholder farmers in the

region. Formerly, researchers have been primarily focused on trainers, nongovernment

humanitarian workers, and government officials’ roles in exploring the livelihood

challenges of smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe. However, Dube et al. (2014), Mapiye

(2016), and Stoeffler et al. (2016) indicated the need for using a qualitative methodology

that gives in-depth access to smallholder farmers’ knowledge gaps with sustainable land

management practices in Zimbabwe.

Limitations

Limitations, a characteristic of every research study, are elements of the study that

are out of the researcher's control and can sometimes impact the study results'

trustworthiness (Golafshani, 2003). The study's first limitation was that the researcher

being a Zimbabwean could inadvertently contribute to cultural bias in the study.

Motivations and influences based on a personal cultural lens can create ethnocentrism in

judging research participants and their responses solely by the values and standards of

one's own culture (Chenail, 2015). To minimize culture bias, a peer debriefer not

belonging to the Zimbabwean culture and skilled in qualitative research methods

analyzed was the same data, and the results were compared and contrasted with the

researcher’s own, with all discrepancies discussed until a consensus was established

(Creswell & Miller, 2000).

The second limitation of the study was that the case study method received

scholarly criticism for not offering statistical generalization, limiting the transferability of

data results or the general population from which the sample of seven smallholder

farmers in Zimbabwe originated (Yin, 2017). The multiple case study method is not used

for this purpose but to augment external validity and guard against observer bias, cross-

case comparison, and advancing theory generation (Stake, 2013).

Significance of the Study

Significance to Practice

The results and recommendations arising from this research may prove useful to

policymakers and other local community leaders who seek to develop local-level policy

and interventions that can stimulate resource-conserving agriculture to improve

sustainable land management practices in smallholder farms in Zimbabwe (OECD, 2018;

Ziadat, Bunning, & De Pauw, 2017). The results of this study may also inform small

farming communities in Zimbabwe on how innovative methods of ecosystem

sustainability particular to their needs can strengthen their impoverished livelihoods.]

Significance to Theory

Scholars have identified a gap in the research literature on documenting and

describing the land management practices and livelihood strategies among smallholder

farmers in Zimbabwe. This research is important because its results will address this gap

in the scholarly literature on developing sustainable land management with a fragile

livelihood system. In the sub-Saharan continent of Africa, agriculture is the backbone of

the economy. In Zimbabwe, land underpins the economic, social, and political lives of

most people (Hakeem, 2015; Moyo et al., 2019). There is evidence that the lack of

suitable mechanisms for disseminating the available knowledge on sustainable land

management from researchers to smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe presents a barrier to

innovation and sustainable adoption of viable land management techniques (Chagumaira

et al., 2016; Murisa, 2011). Before such training can address the needs of the smallholder

farmer, qualitative studies should explore the experiences of smallholder farmers in

Zimbabwe in order to tailor sustainable land management training to their particular

needs (Dube et al., 2014; Mapiye, 2016; Stoeffler, Alwang, Mills, & Taruvinga, 2016)

and contribute such data to the scholarly literature.

Significance to Social Change

This research study may contribute to social change by directly providing

valuable knowledge from smallholder farmers to agricultural educators. In turn, educators

can disseminate this knowledge through training and innovative methods of sustainable

land management practices to smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe, aiming at improved

rural food security and livelihoods, viable crop-livestock systems, and market

participation.

Summary and Transition

In the sub-Saharan continent of Africa, agriculture is the key to the smallholder

livelihoods who live in the rural areas and is considered the backbone of the country’s

economy. There is an interconnectedness of agriculture and environmental change that

requires a serious active role when governments and institutions make policies and

strategies in sustainable agriculture development. Environmental integration should be

reflected in both policies and strategies about the processes of agricultural development.

This should be evidenced by smallholder farmers and other institutions’ concerns to

emphasize enhancing agri-environmental sustainability.

In Zimbabwe, the smallholder farmers saw two agricultural models introduced to

farming livelihoods: the Plough-Based and the Conservation Agriculture (CA). The two

agricultural models were introduced because of their potential to increase yields. The

Plough-Based model focused on five practices: plowing, maintaining, crop rotation, sole

cropping, and planting in line. Plow-based agriculture was abandoned because there was

a continuous decline of yields and was associated with a severe increase of soil erosion in

the farming areas and not soil conservation policies.

Zimbabwe is viewed as a fertile ground for the introduction of Conservation

Agriculture (CA). Three key principles are associated with conservation agriculture

(CA): (a) minimal soil disturbance, which is achieved through the use of minimum-

tillage, (b) permanent soil cover achieved through the mulch of crop residues retention,

and (c) crop rotations. The efforts to intensify smallholder agriculture in the sub-Saharan

countries of Africa, Zimbabwe, in particular, have been failing to yield. More worrying is

the challenge of climate change, increasing drought, a record number of unskilled labor,

and an increase in soil degradation that would diminish soil productivity and natural

resources.

Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature on environmental factors affecting

agriculture in Zimbabwe, such as climate change, deforestation, genetic engineering, soil

degradation, irrigation, pollutants, waste, sustainability, and studies that helped influence

the research. I examined the rising temperature in Zimbabwe, rainfall variability,

diminishing soil productivity, declining natural resources, chronic food insecurity, and

how it can mitigate these challenges.

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Poor land management practices negatively affect most smallholder farmers in

Zimbabwe, resulting in 70% of the national population living in food-insecure

households and below the poverty level (Moyo et al., 2017). Despite field-based evidence

that modern technologies can increase and sustain agricultural yields, adoption levels of

such technologies by smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe have remained low (Kadzamira

& Ajayi, 2019). Dissemination of innovative agricultural training can solve many land

management problems and can be accomplished if farmers accept trainers in their

existing social networks (Dicecca, Pascucci, & Contò, 2016). The specific problem is that

smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe have knowledge gaps on sustainable land management

practices, presenting a barrier to training these farmers on innovative agricultural

practices tailored to their needs (Makate, Makate, Mango, & Siziba, 2019; Moyo et al.,

2019; Scoones, Mavedzenge, & Murimbarimba, 2018). The purpose of this qualitative

multiple case study was to gain a deeper understanding of specific knowledge gaps

among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe to tailor sustainable land management training

to their needs.

In Chapter 2, I present the literature search strategy alongside the conceptual

framework for this study. In the chapter’s literature review, I synthesize knowledge on

the challenges facing smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe in relation to sustainable land

management practices and adoption of innovative agricultural practices that may reverse

these farmers’ fragile livelihoods (see Chagumaira et al., 2016; Mapiye, 2016). The

chapter concludes with a summary of key points.

Literature Search Strategy

I began the literature search by seeking supporting materials on the environmental

factors affecting agriculture in Zimbabwe, such as climate, deforestation, genetic

engineering, irrigation, pollutants, soil degradation, and waste. A specific question of

interest was whether smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe would succeed in attaining

knowledge on sustainable land management, which emphasizes how to sustain land,

water, soil nutrients, and biodiversity (Kadzamira & Ajayi, 2019; Nezomba et al., 2017).

Degraded and nutrient-depleted soils in Zimbabwe create a limitation for the country to

improve crop and livestock productivity. I undertook a keyword search of Walden

University Library databases to find relevant literature concerned with available

knowledge on sustainable land management “to ensure the long-term continuation of

ecosystem services” (Marques et al., 2016, p. 2).

The articles and materials used in this research came from scholarly peer-

reviewed journals. The literature review includes information published from 1985 to

2016, with 85% of the referenced resources published in the last 5 years. To find

literature, I searched Google Scholar and the following Walden University Library

databases: ProQuest, Business Source Premier, and Google Scholar. The search terms I

used are directly related to this study: food security, sustainable livelihoods, biodiversity,

rangeland management, climate change, farmers’ livelihoods, agricultural innovation

systems, knowledge dissemination, land management, information technologies

development, sustainable natural resources management, soil nutrition, socioeconomic,

and sustainable land management.

The current literature and deductive arguments were instrumental in providing

context regarding the natural resources, economic resources, human resources, and social

capitals prevalent in Zimbabwe and their attendant effects (see Scoones, 1998). The

literature review gives a snapshot of land management and smallholder farmers’

livelihoods in Zimbabwe. I also review the literature on climate change, environmental

degradation, and nutrient-depleted soil in Zimbabwe and the impact on agricultural

productivity for both crops and livestock (e.g., Helliker et al., 2018; Nyamadzawo et al.,

2013; Scoones et al., 2018) and the need for smallholder farmers to attain knowledge on

sustainable land management (Berin et al., 2014; Chagumaira et al., 2016).

Conceptual Framework

This study was framed, first, by the sustainable livelihoods framework (Ashley &

Carney, 1999), which “provides an understanding of the livelihoods of local communities

being studied, what assets they have, and what they do/can do with these assets” (Yaro,

2004, p. 9), and, second, by the environmental entitlements framework, which focuses on

the wider influence and importance of diverse institutions operating at multiple-scale

levels from micro to macro (Leach et al. 1999). These institutions influence who has

access to and control over what resources within a specific environment and who

arbitrates contested resource claims (Leach et al. 1999). Colonial systems in Africa

resulted in unequal land ownership structures, leading to, among other serious challenges,

inequality, and poverty (Todes, Kok, Wentzel, Van Zyl, & Cross, 2010). Worldwide, land

reform constitutes a key developmental policy that, at its core, seeks to minimize unequal

resource distribution and drive down poverty rates (Dinh, Cameron, & Nguyen, 2015). In

Zimbabwe, upon gaining independence in 1980, lawmakers saw that land reform

represented a powerful means for righting the country’s natives' wrongs in both social

and economic spheres. Land reform policies were deemed instrumental in tackling

poverty for disadvantaged populations, a case in point being rural dwellers, for whom

subsistence farming is critical to their livelihoods (Helliker et al., 2018; Scoones et al.,

2018).